[address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Lenz
slz at baycix.de
Wed Jun 13 15:09:54 CEST 2007
Hi, Leo Vegoda wrote: > On 13 Jun 2007, at 12:21am, Sascha Lenz wrote: > > [...] > >>> Actually my customer wants to try to anycast streaming audio media. >>> It seems to work in the lab, We want to deploy in the wild now. >> >> that still sounds like an experiment for a new protocol - then follow >> my suggestion - get them an experiemental assignment. If it works out, >> suggest a policy. > > That only works if the experiment is for a non-commercial service: > > "Resources issued must not be used for commercial purposes during > or following the conclusion of the experiment." > > If the service is commercial then it could not benefit from this kind of > assignment. this is somewhat implicit with "experiment". He wrote "they want to try" - that doesn't sound like anything commercial to me, or probably i'm misguided and it is a fact that todays companies use their customers as beta-testers on a regular basis? ;-) If he'd wrote that they had a *REAL* product and they want to *SELL* it, i wouldn't have come up with the experimental pathway in the first place. > If the fees aren't a problem then the easiest way to get the address > space might be to sign up as an LIR, get the minimum allocation and > break it up. It's not the most elegant solution but it should work. *purr* That's quite a customer-friendly rule-bending in my eyes - it doesn't solve the general "how to justify the size of an assignment needed for routing" issue. They only "half-way right" solution to this in my head sounds like becoming LIR and dedicating a sub-allocation of the PA space you get for Anycast announcement. This way you can seperately announce the Sub-Allocation, and have no problems justifying a routable *assignment* The actual assignment within the sub-allocation can be a /29 then or whatever you really need for the Anycast setup. ...doesn't really sound appealing for me though. > That being said, it would be nice to have a policy that didn't encourage > people to do that sort of thing. Correct. Like i pointed out, if there is a *concrete* need for that, i'm more than happy to have yet another policy on this. -- ======================================================================== = Sascha Lenz SLZ-RIPE slz at baycix.de = = Network Operations = = BayCIX GmbH, Landshut * PGP public Key on demand * = ========================================================================
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]